ColorThink vs. Gamutvision

[Jeff Kott]

I want to get either ColorThink or Gamutvision for a very specific need.

I want to map the gamut of my various print profiles against my output color space, with the goal of trying to get the output color space that is larger than my printer profile but not too much larger. I'm currently using a BetaRGB output color space but realize that I'm not sure if it includes all of the colors of my Epson 4800. Also, I'm thinking of upgrading to an Epson 4900 which has a larger gamut and would need to compare my output color space against the x900 ink set.

Any thoughts on which of the two applications would be better for my purpose. Also, I know ColorThink Pro has many more features than ColorThink 2, but I think for my use the basic ColorThink would be adequate. For those of you who use ColorThink Pro, is there a killer feature it has that makes you think it's worth the extra cost.

Thanks in advance for your advice.

Jeff Kott
San Francisco

[terrywyse]

Hi Jeff,

First, I'd strongly recommend you pony up for ColorThink Pro vs. ColorThink.....as you get some experience, you'll start wishing you had some of the extra features in CTPro.

Can't say I know anything GamutVision but I see that it only runs under Windows (CT/CTPro are both Mac and Windows). CT and CTPro are nearly standards for myself and other color management colleagues I know and it was developed by Steve Upton, a real "friend" of the color management community.

Regards,
Terry

[digitaldog]

Ditto, ColorThink Pro. Its amazing the functionality it provides. Now its UI is a bit, uh, unconventional and it can be buggy. But its the swiss army knife of color geek utilities and a must have.

[bjanes]

I want to get either ColorThink or Gamutvision for a very specific need.

I want to map the gamut of my various print profiles against my output color space, with the goal of trying to get the output color space that is larger than my printer profile but not too much larger. I'm currently using a BetaRGB output color space but realize that I'm not sure if it includes all of the colors of my Epson 4800. Also, I'm thinking of upgrading to an Epson 4900 which has a larger gamut and would need to compare my output color space against the x900 ink set.

Any thoughts on which of the two applications would be better for my purpose. Also, I know ColorThink Pro has many more features than ColorThink 2, but I think for my use the basic ColorThink would be adequate. For those of you who use ColorThink Pro, is there a killer feature it has that makes you think it's worth the extra cost.

Jeff,

For what you are doing, either ColorThink2 or GamutVison would be fine.

ColorThink2 has not been upgraded for ages and does not work with Windows7. It does have nicer graphs than GamutVison. I finally got tired of waiting for an updated version of Ver 2 that would run with Win 7, so I upgraded to the Pro version. I don't think that a user should be forced to upgrade merely to run on current operating systems.

Gamutvision has a full demo that works for a limited number of sessions, whereas the demo for ColorThinkPro is very limited, and won't allow you to graph your printer profile. I would try the demo of GamutVision if you are running Windows.

Regards,

Bill

[eronald]

I do wonder whether the Colorsync utility in the Mac OS is not sufficient for all the poster's needs.

Edmund

[Jeff Kott]

I do wonder whether the Colorsync utility in the Mac OS is not sufficient for all the poster's needs.

Edmund

Thanks for the suggestion Edmund, but I'm running Windows 7.

Jeff

[bjanes]

Thanks for the suggestion Edmund, but I'm running Windows 7.

Jeff

If you are on Windows 7, Colorthink2.2 will not work, unless things have changed. GamutVision works fine on Win7. A quick look at BetaRGB (wireframe) and the Epson 7900 with exhibition fiber paper shows a gamut mismatch. Some of the greens that print won't fit into BetaRGB. Why don't you just use ProPhotoRGB?

Regards,

Bill

[Jeff Kott]

A quick look at BetaRGB (wireframe) and the Epson 7900 with exhibition fiber paper shows a gamut mismatch. Some of the greens that print won't fit into BetaRGB. Why don't you just use ProPhotoRGB?

Hi Bill,

I don't have a scientific background and am uncomfortable making the point, but ...... it is my understanding that using a huge color space such as ProPhotoRGB for my output color space and then having my printer driver compress the colors back into the printer profile will cause more color errors than if I used an output color space that more closely matched the color gamut that my printer can produce. If I'm barking up the wrong tree here, I'm all ears.

Jeff

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I want to get either ColorThink or Gamutvision for a very specific need.

I want to map the gamut of my various print profiles against my output color space, with the goal of trying to get the output color space that is larger than my printer profile but not too much larger.

Hi Jeff,

For such a modest requirement, why not just use http://www.iccview.de/content/view/3/7/lang,en/ ?

Of course a program like Gamutvision will also allow to do more specific comparisons, such as the actual image colors versus the profile.

Cheers,
Bart

[tho_mas]

I don't have a scientific background and am uncomfortable making the point, but ...... it is my understanding that using a huge color space such as ProPhotoRGB for my output color space and then having my printer driver compress the colors back into the printer profile will cause more color errors than if I used an output color space that more closely matched the color gamut that my printer can produce. If I'm barking up the wrong tree here, I'm all ears.

no, you don't... it's a valid concern!
Basically there was (and actually still is) a rule that the working color space should be as large as necessary (re printer gamut) but at the same time as small as possible (to avoid, well, problems... such like wasting coding space so that you are working with too large tonal differentiation, just to name one).
However this is not really an issue if you are working in 16bit from RAW to print.
Still care should be taken that you don't exploit the full gamut of a large color space like ProPhoto... as (1) your montitor can't display all that high saturated colors and (2) your printer can't reproduce all that colors. This is especially true for color spaces that contain colors outside the spectral locus (ProPhoto does).
To avoid problems the "gamut warning profile" is a great help:
http://color.org/prmg_gamutwarning.xalter
The idea is to work in ProPhoto and to use the PRMG profile as a general gamut warning profile.... i.e. to set the PRMG in the softoproof settings and enable the gamut warning (but you should disable "preview" for the softproof - you don't want to convert to the PRMG... you just want to utilize the gamut warning). This way your master file is stored in ProPhoto but the gamut warning profile prevents you from exploiting too high saturated colors.
When you've finished editing your master file save a copy, switch the softproof to the printer profile you want to print to and fine adjust the file with regard to that particular printer profile (in this case with "preview" enabled, of course).
Also have a look at the description of Photogamut-RGB which will clarify the basic concept further: http://photogamut.org/E_idea.html
I've used this profile as a general gamut warning profile for some time (before the PRMG profile was available) and that worked quite good.

[bjanes]

Hi Bill,

I don't have a scientific background and am uncomfortable making the point, but ...... it is my understanding that using a huge color space such as ProPhotoRGB for my output color space and then having my printer driver compress the colors back into the printer profile will cause more color errors than if I used an output color space that more closely matched the color gamut that my printer can produce. If I'm barking up the wrong tree here, I'm all ears.

An excellent point, and the degree to which that would occur would depend on the printer profile and rendering intent. Mike Chaney has a nice summary. Relative colorimetric clips out of gamut rather than trying to compress the image. Perceptual rendering attempts to compress out of gamut colors and uses a predefined amount of compression of colors outside of a gamut determined by the maker of the profile as likely to include real world colors. In the case of ProPhotoRGB, the entire gamut of the space is not compressed. Current color conversion engines do not look at the gamut of the image to see if compression is needed, and apply the predetermined amount of compression whether it is needed or not.

I don't know if ICC Ver 4 profiles alter this situation. In fact, I have not seen a good account of the advantages of Ver 4 for practical work. Perhaps the DigitalDog or other experts can chime in.

Regards,

Bill

[RHPS]

Thanks for the suggestion Edmund, but I'm running Windows 7.

Jeff

But wouldn't the Windows colour utility do it? At the very least it allows you to compare 3-D plots of two profiles.

Edit: Just realised it's for Win XP!

[digitaldog]

V4 profiles and the their use of (if available) PRMG just ain’t yet ready for prime time. The use of the profiles to render to/from the PRMG is not the issue. That is pretty much straightforward. Now the availablility of v4 profiles that use the PRMG explicitly and set the tag is the main problem today.

[lmwacctg]

Jeff:

I've been using Gamutvision for 2 1/2 years and it does a fine job. Currently I have it running on a Windows 7 machine.


Don

[digitaldog]

There’s so much “stuff” ColorThink Pro can do, it boggles the mind. Yes, the UI is a little rough around the edges, its a huge processor hog but its the swiss army knife for color geeks. For me, its indispensable.

[Jeff Kott]

There’s so much “stuff” ColorThink Pro can do, it boggles the mind. Yes, the UI is a little rough around the edges, its a huge processor hog but its the swiss army knife for color geeks. For me, its indispensable.

Just to come full circle on this thread, as I mentioned in the similar thread recently posted, I downloaded a trial version of Gamutvision and ended up buying Colorthink Pro, which I am very happy with. I prefer Colorthink Pro's graphing function to Gamutvision's and ss Andrew has pointed out, there is a lot more functionality in Colorthink Pro.

After using Colorthink to look at a lot of color spaces in relation to the Imageprint and Epson stock profiles for my 4900, I agree with what Jeff Schewe has said in that ProPhoto RGB seems to be the only color space I have tested that does not clip the gamut of the 4900 output profiles. As Bill Janes pointed out and I have reconfirmed, BetaRGB (and BestRGB) both clip the blues and greens of Epson 4900 output profiles by a pretty significant amount.

[Alan Goldhammer]

If you are on Windows 7, Colorthink2.2 will not work, unless things have changed. GamutVision works fine on Win7. A quick look at BetaRGB (wireframe) and the Epson 7900 with exhibition fiber paper shows a gamut mismatch. Some of the greens that print won't fit into BetaRGB. Why don't you just use ProPhotoRGB?

Regards,

Bill

Website now shows a Win7 version number 2.3.  It's much less expensive than the Pro version.